Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
SiCKO Is Boffo
In 1971, Edgar Kaiser, the son of the founder of Kaiser Permanente, one of the first big HMOs, went to see John Ehrlichman, a top aide to President Nixon, to lobby the Nixon White House to pass legislation that would expand the market for health maintenance organizations (HMOs). Ehrlichman reported this conversation to Nixon on February 17, 1971. The discussion, which was taped, went like this:
Ehrlichman: I had Edgar Kaiser come in...talk to me about this and I went into it in some depth. All the incentives are toward less medical care, because the less care they give them, the more money they make.
President Nixon: Fine.
The next day, Nixon publicly announced he would be pushing legislation that would provide Americans "the finest health care in the world."
When tapes of the Nixon-Ehrlichman conversation and Nixon's subsequent public statement are played halfway through Michael Moore's new movie SiCKO, it is one of the film's more revealing moments. By this point in the film, Moore has already demonstrated that health insurance companies and HMOs are parasitic villains that routinely deny necessary medical care to make more bucks--even when their money-grubbing leads to the death of patients. Looking for the original sin that led to the present mess, Moore zeroes in on this Nixonian moment, which encapsulates the film's premise that the United States health care system is defined by a fundamental conflict: profit versus care, and--no surprise--profit beats care.
Moore makes this point magnificently in SiCKO, which is the best film in the Moore canon. I say this as one who had a mixed reaction to Fahrenheit 9/11. (See here.) This time around, Moore has crafted a tour de force that his enemies will have a tough time blasting (though they will still try). It's not as tendentious as his earlier works. It posits no conspiracy theories. The film skillfully blends straight comedy, black humor, tragedy, and advocacy. You laugh, you cry--literally. And you get mad.
The film stitches together a string of health care horror stories. Moore opens the movie by looking at two cases involving Americans who don't have health insurance. One fellow who sliced off the tips of two fingers is told at the hospital that he can attach the ring finger for $12,000 and the middle finger for $60,000. He can't afford both. Ever the romantic, Moore reports, this man opts to save his ring finger.
But SiCKO is not about the uninsured. It's about those who have insurance and who have been screwed. Moore began this project by advertising on the Web for tales of health care woe. Within a week, he had received 25,000 emails. That's plenty of raw material. One enterprising father of a child who was going deaf and whose insurance company would only pay for one ear implant wrote his insurance firm and asked if its CEOs would like to appear in Moore's film. The company--whaddayaknow--quickly authorized payment for the other implant.
From this flood of complaints, Moore drew compelling and heartbreaking stories. A woman is denied payment for a major procedure because she neglected to mention on her insurance application that she once had a yeast infection (which was, of course, unrelated to the procedure she needed). A mother loses her 18-month-old daughter because a hospital won't treat her without authorization from her insurance company and her insurer insists she takes the child (during an emergency situation) to an in-network hospital. A woman who was in a car crash is denied payment for an ambulance trip because she did not receive pre-approval for that cost. A man is denied a bone-marrow transplant that could save his life and dies.
Moore interviews health care industry insiders who confirm the worst suspicions. A former employee at a health insurance sales centers cries as she talks about how she was trained to handle prospective clients who might be health risks. "I'm such a bitch on the phone," she says. Doctors who worked for health care companies tell how they were encouraged to deny claims to save their companies money. Medical reviewers for one health insurance company who rendered the most denials received bonuses. Footage from a video surveillance camera shows a Los Angeles hospital dumping an indigent patient on Skid Row. "Who are we?" Moore asks. "Is this what we have become: a nation that dumps its own citizens?"
Moore's meta-message is, It doesn't have to be this way. He visits Canada, England, and France and compares their health care delivery systems to America's. He plays this for loads of yucks. In a British hospital, he goes looking for the place where a patient has to pay his or her bill. He cannot find such a check-out counter. Then--a-ha!--he finds a cashier. But--here comes the punch line--this is where the hospital hands out cash to patients who need a few pounds to cover the cost of their transportation home. Yes, in a British hospital you can leave with more money than you came in with.
What about those put-upon doctors who must work under the heavy yoke of Britain's National Health Service? He interviews a young doctor who drives a new Audi and lives in a posh million-dollar flat. The British system, the doc says, is fine for doctors--unless you want to live in a $3 million flat and own three or four cars. As for drugs, every prescription in England costs the equivalent of ten bucks--no matter what drug or how much of it. An American who blew out his shoulder trying to walk across the famous intersection at Abbey Road on his hands tells Moore that he obtained great hospital care for no money.
Ditto Canada. Ditto France. Doing his I-can't-believe-it act, Moore grills Americans and locals in each country who relate stories of receiving quality care for no payments. A Canadian doctor, with a straight face, says that he has "never told anyone we couldn't put a finger back on" because of a patient's inability to pay. In the land of surrender-monkeys, Moore discovers that government-paid doctors--Sacre bleu!--make house calls, and new parents are visited by federally-paid daycare providers. And get this: a fellow who completes chemo in France gets three months of paid leave to recuperate (on a beach in the south of France, no less). No wonder, the United States ranks 37th in the world when it comes to the health of its citizens, just edging out Slovenia.
Moore whacks the U.S. political system for catering to the needs of the insurance industry not the citizenry, pointing out that the health care lobby pumps millions of dollars into the campaigns of lawmakers. He notes that Senator Hillary Clinton ☼, once the scourge of the health care industry, has become a top recipient of contributions from health care firms. (Movie mogul Harvey Weinstein, executive producer of the film and a friend of Hillary Clinton, pressed Moore to cut that part of the film. Moore turned him down. In a recent interview, Weinstein conceded he had asked Moore to delete this portion.)
In the film's climax, Moore gets on a boat in Miami with three 9/11 rescue workers who have been unable to obtain the necessary treatment for ailments apparently caused by their exposure to debris at Ground Zero. His mission: bring them and other health care industry victims to the Guatanamo detention facility in Cuba, where (according to the Bush administration and Republican congressional leaders) the detainees typically receive fine medical treatment. Gitmo, Moore cracks, is "the only place on American soil with free universal health care."
Moore's small flotilla approaches the camp. He takes out a bullhorn and shouts, I have three 9/11 rescue workers who need medical attention. He adds, They just want the kind of treatment al Qaeda is getting. No one in the guard tower responds. A siren goes off. Maybe we better leave, he says. Moore takes the rescue workers and the others to the Havana Hospital where they receive--as do all Cubans there--free quality treatment.
Sure, it's a stunt--but a telling one. One of the rescue workers is living on a monthly disability payment of $1000. Her inhaler costs $120, and she needs at least two a month. She breaks down and cries when she learns she can purchase the same drug in Cuba for five cents. Were she a suspected terrorist in Gitmo, she would get the device for free.
Moore's right. The health care system in the United States is a bad deal for many Americans. (Don't get me started about Oxford, which routinely denies almost every claim I submit for my family.) He glosses over some of the problems overseas (the French social welfare system is under much pressure), but he debunks the hyperbolic scare-'em criticisms hurled at the Canadian and British systems by free-marketeers who defend the U.S. system. As for the charge that a universal health care system would be "socialized medicine," Moore rightfully counters that in the United States there's socialism when it comes to the public well-being; there are public schools, public fire departments, and public libraries. What about public health?
In the film, Canadians, Brits and French laugh at Americans for their cockamamie health care system. Explaining their own systems, they all say that it's a matter of communal security: we take care of each other. In other words, leave no citizen behind. Moore does not explicitly call for a particular set of reforms. But he clearly wants a taxpayer-funded system that cuts out the insurance companies and provides universal care to all.
Health care policy can be mind-numbingly complicated. Try to sort out the differences between Senator Barack Obama's health care plan and Senator John Edwards' proposal. And remember the wire chart the GOP cooked up for Hillary Clinton's proposed reform? But Moore, to his credit, cuts through the surface-level details and gets to the essentials. Why not health care for all? Why allow corporate profit-mongers to decide whether an 18-month-old girl lives or dies? Why is the population of the United States, as wealthy as this nation is, not as healthy as the population of Britain, France, Canada, and 33 other countries? Why settle for a sick system?
Advocates of universal health care (note I say care, not coverage) are hoping SiCKO leads to political change. The California Nurses Association, which supports a single-payer system, is organizing across the country in conjunction with the movie's appearance. It's hard to see a film moving a nation--and, in particular, the politicians who pocket all those health care industry dollars. But Moore has produced a work that maximizes his talents as social critic, humorist, filmmaker, journalist, and advocate. SiCKO is brilliantly funny and sad. It's a dead-on diagnosis. Don't get sick before seeing this film.
Just out in paperback: HUBRIS: THE INSIDE STORY OF SPIN, SCANDAL, AND THE SELLING OF THE IRAQ WAR, the best-selling book by David Corn and Michael Isikoff. Click here for information on the book. The New York Times calls Hubris "the most comprehensive account of the White House's political machinations" and "fascinating reading." The Washington Post says, "There have been many books about the Iraq war....This one, however, pulls together with unusually shocking clarity the multiple failures of process and statecraft." Tom Brokaw notes Hubris "is a bold and provocative book that will quickly become an explosive part of the national debate on how we got involved in Iraq." Hendrik Hertzberg, senior editor of The New Yorker notes, "The selling of Bush's Iraq debacle is one of the most important--and appalling--stories of the last half-century, and Michael Isikoff and David Corn have reported the hell out of it." For highlights from Hubris, click here.
© 2007 The Nation



19 Comments so far
Show AllAnd to think that on a per capita basis we are paying twice as much for health care. And that includes the 50,000,000 that don't have any insurance at all. Makes you want to break out the American flag and wave it around doesn't it?
From five to ten times as many people die every year from inadequate health care than died on 9/11. You don't see the Bush administration sending in troops in the interest of regime change at Kaiser Permanente, do you? What's it gonna take, America, what's it gonna take until we get off our lazy asses and put these bastards back under the rock they crawled out from?
What it will take, is a national movement that protests outside hospitals and nursing homes against the entire sicko system itself. Lobbying will not get the job done, but anger correctly channeled into a highly vocal and visible movement will.
As a nurse, I know first hand that nurses will not do the political leg work, since they fear for their licenses if they show their opposition to the current state of affairs in this manner. But there really is no substitute for being outside these medical 'towers of doom' with protest signs and political agitation that demands drastic changes to corporate medical practices NOW.
With Moore's new film, we have a golden opportunity to start this movement and get it rolling into action. I fear, though, that it will just briefly bump up the level of lobbying instead, and we will get little return from his valiant effort to jump start action on this issue.
Makes you want to take out the US flag and BURN it. Worst health care system in the world is in the US. Funny how Americans think it's the best! LOL A feat of propaganda by the fascist US media. A medical worker yeaterday told me that US doctors go into medicine for the money, not the vocation!! Wow! There's the evil root of the US system...MONEY! Get the profit out of medicine. 100% universal health care for all, paid for by government.
davepepper, I agree, lets have healthcare brought to you by the same folks who cannot issue US passports in less than six months. I really want them scheduling my next heart surgery. Let's have medical care brought to us by the folks who run King/Drew medical center in Los Angeles (a government hospital) where someone was allowed to DIE in the waiting room because they did not like her attitude.
"Worst system in the world"? Do you mean number 212 out of 212 countries? Are you saying that health care in Zimbabwe, North Korea, China, India, or Russia is better? Do you have statistics to back this claim up?
Having been a resident of London in my early days, I can only vouch for the fact that the National Health there works. As for worrying about the government screwing it up, I'll take my chances with an elected government running things over a corporate arrangement one any day.
David Korn asks:
Why not health care for all? Why allow corporate profit-mongers to decide whether an 18-month-old girl lives or dies? Why is the population of the United States, as wealthy as this nation is, not as healthy as the population of Britain, France, Canada, and 33 other countries? Why settle for a sick system?
************
Of course the answer in part is that there are too many people making too much money off of "business as usual".
The other question that is begged is: "If health care insurance benefits from government ownership, then why not property, auto, and all other insurance required for prudent provision?
If mandatory insurance, then why not all broadscast media going out over the public airwaves as well as the Internet--and before you know it the country is becoming seriously socialist and people are loving it(except for all those fat cats who have had their rackets liquidated.)
As John Lennon once observed:
"You may call me a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
Powerslave,
When you argue for all these horrible outcomes of a US national healthcare system, you DO realize that you are also arguing that Americans must be uniquely stupid and incompetent, aren't you?
Because, every truly civilized industrialized country has a national healthcare system, and their level of service, and levels of public health are better than the US by every measure - all at less than half the cost.
I met my American wife in London but we have lived here for nine years. In England we had an extremely difficult pregnancy involving visits to a specialist every two weeks for six months, several prenatal procedures including four blood transfusions for the baby inside the womb (the specialist we later found out is one of the world's leading authorities on pre-natal medicine, I kid you not), a C-section, a day in intensive care, and finally all the counselling we needed after the baby died.
All we had to pay for was the funeral. And my wife was not even a UK citizen.
Last year I fell and blew out my knee in the parking lot at work. I have one of those outsourced white-collar jobs with no benefits. If I hadn't got worker's comp it would have bankrupted me.
And yes, we pay slightly higher taxes in England. But we're happy to do it.
Sack the insurance companies, fire the HMO's and all the parasitic administrators. Have government buy all the drugs and run the healthcare system and pay the wages. And if it costs more, get it by having the corporations and billionaires pay their fair share of taxes for a damn change.
What sort of culture puts regular people in the position of being "bitches" whose main job is to screw people over? What sort of culture pays people salaries to decline health care for those whose lives depend on it, or even for those whose fingers depend on it? (A culture worthy of the dustbin of history, that's for sure.)
I can imagine that the woman who described her job wasn't a fat cat, but one more of us working yahoos just trying to pay the mortgage, the car payment, and our own medical bills.
I can also imagine that the folks who deny health care to others as part of their jobs and whose jobs as a consequence result in other people getting sicker or even losing their lives don't see themselves as horrible people, or even as bad people, necessarily. They are merely doing their jobs.
And where have I heard that line before? "I was just doing my job." Oh yeah. Nuremberg.
The nation has changed, the language is different, the crimes are less horrific, but really, are the deep-seated cultural values any different?
When production and profit are the bottom line, and most people are beholden to those for whom production and profit are the bottom line, what else do we expect?
Single-payer health care is a start, but if we expect any real changes in the long run, we have got to figure out how to change this god-forsaken culture at the root. Otherwise, crimes against one another and against the earth itself will continue to be perpetrated by us regular folks while the rich laugh all the way to the bank.
One large problem with getting acceptance of national healthcare is that the US has largely succeedded where the old Soviet Union failed - they tried to create a homo Sovieticus - a New Soviet Man who would naturally and unthinkingly act selflessly in solidarity with his fellow citizens.
But unfortunately, through the application of considerable more propaganda resources than the SU ever had, (also called the corporate media), they have succeeded in creating a homo Capitalisticus Selfishiticus Norteamericanus - or as Moore once said me-me-me-me!
Only in the US would someone express, as someone did in CD a couple weeks ago: "Why shoud I pay for someone who gets hurt skydiving". Human compassion itself has been successfully excised from the USan psyche, and the scary consequences of this are unfolding in ways that extend way beyond healthcare.
JBPM, you are right. great as the healthcare of canada, britain, etc., is, it is constantly under assault, and it's only a matter of time before the profit-system seeks to dismantle the health care in those countries. it's already happening.
what's the answer? i don't know, but marxism looks more and more attractive to me every day.
www.wsws.org
PDJ: Powerful satire.
Limey1: Sorry about the loss of the baby.
JBPM: Great point about what SORT of person, job description, and protocols are involved in these insurance companies, as per their "I was only following orders" recipe for daily humanitarian disasters.
As he did in *Bowling for Columbine*, Moore measures the US against Canada and finds his country wanting. I would just like to remind Americans that the way we in Canada got our superior healthcare system (now being eroded because of Washington pressure through NAFTA) was by having a federal third party -- a party which has never held power nationally but nevertheless shamed the two major parties into building a decent social safety net for Canadians.
It was Kiefer Sutherland's granddaddy, socialist Tommy Douglas who, as premier of my home province, Saskatchewan, established a province-wide healthcare system. Doctors whined and complained, some went on strike, others left the province. We simply hired doctors from out of country. Within two years the program was working beautifully. Other provinces were envious. Tommy led the charge for making the program federal. Embarrassed by Saskatchewan's success, the ruling Liberals reluctantly established universal Canadian healthcare. It was only with the signing of CAFTA (followed by NAFTA) in the late 1980s that the program has been cut to the bone as part of the neoliberal campaign to make Canada "competitive." One presumes that when our social programs are as tattered and non-existent as America's, we will have achieved nirvana.
I used to work as a computer programmer for United Healthcare in Miami, Fl. SOP was to deny EVERY workers comp claim up front. One year UHC raised premiums significantly, not because it was losing money, they were making hundreds of millions, but because their profits were not going to meet Wall St analyst predictions. We were repeatedly told that the companies number one goal was to increase the stock price, not care for patients. One time the CEO sent out a global email telling all employees to write their congressmen in opposition to the Patients Bill of Rights. I sent out a "reply to all" urging everyone to do the opposite. Fortunately for me the CEO (an all managers) never read email, only had their assistants send them.
After three years I quit feeling dirty and disgusted for having worked for the Devil.
I have been a registered nurse for 30 years and I am thoroughly disgusted with our health care system. I have seen psychiatric patients "milked" for their benefits until the insurance company wouldn't pay anymore and then miraculously, they were declared "cured." I have seen people in the end stages of life (from accidents or disease,) given complicated surgeries and therapies with no hope of helping them or even extending their lives (in my opinion, just for profitability and liability reasons.) I myself can't get individual health insurance because of something as common and relatively benign as uterine fibroids.
Our system is extremely sick and has to be completely re-invented.
Our citizens and residents deserve no less.
"(note I say care, not coverage)"
This is a key key key point. THE thing that, as an australian, amazes me whenever I hear americans talking about unversal healt *insurance*. It is not about insurance. The point of insurance is that you pay more in premiums than (on average) you get back. Insurance is a numbers game. Health care is not.
that's right, Paul M. several dem candidates are pushing "universal coverage," which will just extend the harrowing system we have to (most) everybody.
this will be the issue (coverage vs. care) that they will try to use to ensure that profit-maximizing masquerading as health care continues.
Creating a national healthcare system palatable to Americans is a real mind wringer. First, there is the jealousy factor pointed out above. "Why should I have to pay taxes to cover the medical bills of someone whose fat, smokes, plays extreme sports etc etc?" Then there is the bad rap it has in the States ie cuba's hospitals are filthy Canada has the infamous waiting list. Also, ppl know the competition factor pushes innovation. So how to overcome these hurdles? Why not brainstorm? I'll go first.
First, politicians will never challenge private health insurance companies. Too much money to retaliate, too many speculators who'll spook about the effect it would have on the economy. A one issue task party thats driven by this issue and vanilla on other issues would be the best bet. Harder to divide and tag as pinko. Wins by populism and low cost propaganda made possible by the Internet. Grabs up the lower levels of goverment, as Presidential runs would be a costly waste. House proposed bills defended by street heat. The ultimate goal, a bit far fetched but the only one I feel is secure is outlawing private health insurance and then nationalizing the companies' private insurance assets. Simplying banning private insurance would create MANY enemies and a strong resistance, banning and nationalizing would make fewer enemies and meet (comparatively) weaker resistance. Now for message. All to often the Left increases its burden by ceding American nationaism to our opposition. Why not embrace it this time? Don't compare to other countries, alot of ppl take that the wrong way. Instead make it out that our solution to the healthcare problem is 'unique' and 'special', a testament to the ever more perfect perfect United States. Americans eat that stuff up, ya know. Anyway please add to my ideas and/or tear them down and present your own. Brainstorm time!